FAIZANUDDIN PUNIMATI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against appellants conviction under soon 302 IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 100/- awarded vide judgment dated 5.7.1986, passed in Sessions Trial No. 54/85 of the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh.

(2.) Pilabai was married to Radheshyam, son of the present appellant. On 11.5.1984 at night, the appellant gave Pilabai rice mixed with milk to eat. After eating the same Pilabai started feeling unwell. She was immediately rushed by the appellant to Sarsiva Hospital where Dr. R.S. Joshi (P.W. 4) finding her condition critical referred her to Sarangarh Hospital. Accordingly, she was taken to Sarangarh Hospital, where Dr. T .R. Sahu (P.W. 5) admitted her indoor and Started giving her treatment. Her condition continued to remain precarious. Next day that is on 12.5.1984, she breathed her last at 11.00 p.m. For most of the time she was under treatment, she remained unconscious. The Hospital Authorities reported Pilabais death to Police vide Ex. P-14. Dr. Sahu, who conducted autopsy on the body of Pilabai vide his report Ex. P.7, opined that she died of respiratory failure due to unknown reason. Her viscera was preserved duly sealed which was sent by the Police to Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar. Ex. P.20, the report of Chemical Examiner, showed presence of Zinc Phosphate poison in the viscera. On these facts, the appellant was tried on charge of murdering Pilabai and was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

(3.) Appellants learned Counsel argued that PilabaiTs parents were present at the hospital. They did not disclose any suspicion against the appellant. The relations between the deceased and her mother-in-law were normal. It was the appellant herself who immediately rushed the deceased to hospital when she complained of nausea. The medical evidence shows that Pilabai remained unconscious through out her stay in the hospital. The dying declaration said to have been made to Kamlabai, (P.W.l) was not disclosed to the police or the hospital authorities immediately. Therefore, the same is subject to doubt but even if it is held to be truthful, it does not furnish basis for appellants conviction because assuming that Pilabai started feeling nausea after eating the rice mixed with milk given by the appellant, the possibility of the poison having been mixed with either the rice or the milk accidentally cannot be ruled out. This is more so because the relations between the deceased and her mother-in-law were not strained. We have perused the statement of Kamlabai, she has admitted in para-4 of her statement that Pilabai never made any complaint against her husband and members of his family. She has also admitted that Pilabai was being treated nicely by her in-laws. She has added that the appellant used to ask Pilabai to get up early in the morning in the interest of household work which the later was not able to comply with. In our considered opinion this by itself cannot be considered sufficient to furnish motive to the appellant to commit the murder of her daughter-in-law. On its basis the impact of KamlabaiTs statement that Pilabai was treated nicely by her in-laws is not washed away. Therefore, the evidence of Kamlabai appears to be wholly reliable. She has not suppressed anything nor has resorted to exaggerations and embellishments. We therefore, hold the dying declaration to her as duly proved. However, admitting the truth of this dying declaration, all that stands proved is that Pilabai had disclosed to her mother that she was given rice mixed with milk to eat by her mother- in-law and soon after eating it, she started feeling nausea. The trial Court has without any basis held that the appellant was in possession of poison found in viscera. There is no evidence whatsoever to infer that the appellant was in possession of any such poison. Therefore, in absence of any motive, it is not possible to hold that the poison found in the viscera was administered to Pilabai by the appellant. Appellants subsequent conduct in immediately rushing Pilabai to Dr. at Sarsiwa and thereafter in shifting her to Govt. Hospital, Sarangarh, also confirms her innocence. Had she been guilty, she would naturally have tried to delay Pilabais shifting to the hospital so that the matter may not become public. In these circumstances, the possibility of. accidental mixture of poison at some point either in the rice or in the milk cannot be ruled out. That being so the appellant is entitled to benefit of the reasonable doubt